Clark County, WA, the place where I sleep, had an election today on a bond measure to fund a decent library system. Now you’d think this would be the kind of thing everybody would get behind, but this place is weird. The local Taliban, AKA LifePAC, waged jihad against the measure on the grounds that the young people aren’t adequately protected against the porn that forces itself onto library patrons through unfiltered computers, but I suspect their real issue is books on evolution. The leader of the book-burning faction, Margaret Tweet, is a member of fundamentalist church that believes Satan rules the world and the 66 books of the Bible are the complete and infallible word of God. There’s not much point in a library if you believe that sort of thing, and porn is a great excuse for derailing it.
Every day for the past month, one of their minions had a letter published in the local dog-trainer on the evils of libraries, some of the weirdest, most paranoid, and generally sex-obsessed crap you’ve ever seen. Early returns have the measure leading, but not securing the 60% necessary to pass, so the terrorists may win this round.
UPDATE: The library district is created, but the bond measure to fund it fails; victory to the Clark County Taliban. Those of us who believe in learning, progress, and reason will clearly have to organize and fight a better fight another day.
One of the more amusing “doctrinal statements” I’ve seen:
1. Why do they have to invent jargon such as “tri-unity,” when Christendom has done just fine, thank you, for hundreds of years with “trinity?”
2. “Satan has limited access to the presence of God.” Does this mean he has read, but not write privileges in the Deity’s presence?
3. “He and the demons who serve him particularly hate the elect and though we may be oppressed by him we have power over him through Jesus Christ, further we believe that it is impossible for them to be possessed by Satan, meaning that, he is unable to separate the elect from the love of God, to claim ownership them, or to control them.” It’s a core part of their doctrine that there are beings that really, really hate them.
4. “We believe and confess that God created man as a personal and moral being composed of both material and immaterial facets.” What the hell is an “immaterial facet?”
5.”Furthermore, we believe and confess that God created man in His own image,3 fit for fellowship with Him and forever responsible to Him as Maker and Lord.” This sentence has one of my favorite fundamentalist words: “fellowship.” As in, I’m going over to the pastor’s house and fellowship with his wife… IOW, another word that doesn’t really convey anything- does this mean “hang out,” “visit,” or what?
6.”* By “local expression” we mean the “pressing out” of the nature of the universal Church in the practical life of the local Church.”
I see. It’s got to do with dry cleaning…
7. “We believe in the imminent, sudden1, visible2 return of the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven with power and great glory3 on a day known only to God, the Father.”
Yet another of my favorite words: “glory.” Let’s go to the dictionary: “Great honor, praise, or distinction accorded by common consent; renown.”
I always wondered about they psychological implications of this belief system; anyway, these folks need not only a good shrink but a good proofreader. They’ve created a babble all their own.
I don’t know anything about the group/church which you mention. I am by no means defending anything they believe, or involvement they had in the library issue you mention. Although, I will say I don’t appreciate your post in which you liken someone that believes in the Bible as someone that is a member of the Taliban.
Also your use of the word fundamentalists was an attempt to paint the church aforementioned as an extremists, but if you would check your dictionary the term fundamentalist can be used to describe someone who holds the literal meaning of the Bible as their fundamental (basic or foundational) belief.
“the 66 books of the Bible are the complete and infallible word of God. There’s not much point in a library if you believe that sort of thing”
I’m not sure where you are going with this, unless you are saying that people that believe the Bible are unlearned and have no desire to become learned. I myself do believe the Bible to be literal, but I don’t quite understand your basis for this statement.
Again, I’ll repeat I’m not defending this church or their stand. I am however pointing out some comparisons and labels that you have made that I don’t think are fair.
The Bible was written by men writing in Aramaic and Greek, so it could only have “literal” meaning in those languages as they were spoken back in the day.
Anyone who claims that an English translation of the Bible is the literal and complete word of God is either stupid or crazy, and would have been burned by the Inquisition as a heretic.
This view of the Bible is an insult to God, Kevin.
First, I’m not sure why you have to continue to label people when you don’t agree with them.
So what are you saying, that only people that know Hebrew and Greek can understand what the Bible? Had this view prevailed during the time of the Inquisition, the common man never would have come to know the true grace and mercy of God, but rather would have only known God through an image painted to him by the ruling church at that time.
Yes they were burned at the stake and yes they were labeled as a heretic, but thankfully because of them we have the Bible today in the English lanquage.
I’m not sure that believing that God’s word has been preserved today in the English language is an insult to God.
I’m saying that only people who read ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek – fluently – can claim to understand the literal meaning of the Bible. Given that you don’t, why don’t you settle for the book’s figurative meaning? That way do don’t have to execute your wife if she doesn’t happen to be a virgin on your wedding night, or if she wears poly/cotton blends, or if she refuses to follow your commands. It just makes life simpler when you’re reasonable.
The whole, “execute wife if she’s not a virgin or if she wears poly/cotton blends” is not saying that you should go and kill your wife…Those things were simply customs that the Jewish people had during those times…Yea it may sound unreasonable because it is, but that doesn’t mean the bible is. The bible was simply telling you the truth about the times in which those laws were in place. The New law is the law of love which was put in place by our entryway to heaven, Jesus.
A translation, any translation, is an interpretation. That’s obvious.
Anyone who pronounces the “truth” or “meaning” of the Bible is giving an interpretation.
Any text, in any language, has multiple meanings. Like a film, there can be multiple “readings”, depending on your point of view. Any number of these readings can be “correct”, & the form of the interpretation changes over time. It’s important to note the word time here. Why? Because, something created in time affects other things created in time, over time. That’s not just playing with words. The way we see the past changes, because our understanding of the past changes
as we change. As the world changes.
The “truth” or “meaning” of the Bible is not static. Some aspects may seem to be, because they deals with moral & ethical questions, & these may seem to change less over time than do cultural practices.
God may stand for what doesn’t change, but man’s expression of the changeless is infinitely variable.